From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-54742-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44990138010
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sun, 16 Sep 2012 13:53:17 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8A69BE0020;
	Sun, 16 Sep 2012 13:53:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-pb0-f53.google.com (mail-pb0-f53.google.com [209.85.160.53])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B43621C06A;
	Sun, 16 Sep 2012 13:52:05 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by pbbro2 with SMTP id ro2so8587463pbb.40
        for <multiple recipients>; Sun, 16 Sep 2012 06:52:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mime-version:content-type
         :content-disposition:user-agent;
        bh=mP1fA8TVYdI7VJFoIZecDEQGJ2X7eqvoNLLu15Z0Ypc=;
        b=0Ur3+kr7oJGYW19/ncXuAuVys/PzKNnKjht//jih7JvFWE851Qw1FOxlKGfAgrAf7n
         B7w0uvp+8aON8I0rJ8553G22lraPzKS1566MCyLlay8Da5aF5w/JT6cY2eK1BBXWwTvf
         S8aeetAXc0PUgEXeThFna8iNJNNsN9DKl43Ixtaf+tOeMmppZ6OFi2bSFm8XQMcRYrDa
         hMGmP+jYpMs5ZtsLLOKV2njZi33S4A/2+mFGzs2Ol+QU760ZFPuu/ulazHrreion6W0x
         rhoJGkR8JeVr5GMNqcdUEnRQxqGm+2Hv3Brfrl02m2b7yWm86zbIxTUUt2NQlB45zeAG
         zf7Q==
Received: by 10.68.189.70 with SMTP id gg6mr16395416pbc.125.1347803525341;
        Sun, 16 Sep 2012 06:52:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.gmail.com:587 (74-95-192-101-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [74.95.192.101])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id pj8sm5058968pbb.60.2012.09.16.06.51.59
        (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
        Sun, 16 Sep 2012 06:52:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by smtp.gmail.com:587 (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 16 Sep 2012 06:52:11 -0700
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 06:52:11 -0700
From: Brian Harring <ferringb@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Cc: gentoo-pms@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: [gentoo-dev] GLEP: gentoo sync based unified deps proposal
Message-ID: <20120916135211.GC23030@localhost>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Archives-Salt: 8535646d-5ea3-4393-a8a7-0b9114c1792c
X-Archives-Hash: 137ade6346dcedbf9b344c3e423c9c07

Folks-

Keeping it short and quick, a basic glep has been written for what I'm 
proposing for DEPENDENCIES enhancement.

The live version of the doc is available at 
http://dev.gentoo.org/~ferringb/unified-dependencies/extensible_dependencies.html 

Wording fixes will occur, but the core concept shouldn't change (and 
if it does, per PEP standards, the changes will be noted/tracked).

Please have a read through; it should be clear/concise as to why PM 
authors are pushing for a unified dependencies to be done, what we can 
get from it now, what it enables moving forward, and the direct cost 
to devs should this idea be implemented.

Just to be absolutely clear, what I'm proposing is basically zero cost 
for devs- they can (and should when it's in their benefit) switch to 
the new syntax when it makes their job easier; it can be used in 
parallel to existing DEPEND/RDEPEND/PDEPEND both to ease 
transition/compatibility.

In addition, a prototype portage patch has been cut for dependencies 
support (needs work/full validation), and a matching pkgcore one has 
been cut.

I realize it's a complex subject; if you have questions, please feel 
to ask.

Thanks, and pardon the ancillary/daft noise that has gone with this 
subject.

~harring